via www.sherdog.com

I am pretty tired of all of the talk being focused on so-called “robberies” in this weekend’s close main event battle and very little attention being paid to the failures of the current MMA judging/scoring system.  Based on the entire outcry from the fights this weekend, I feel like no one is satisfied with the current system in place.  The 10-point must system is inadequate to determine the winner of a fight in which a majority of the rounds were tight.  The first 4 rounds of the Machida/Rua fight were really close and really tough to judge.  The scoring system in place now doesn't take into account that each judge may be looking at the fight differently and has different views on what is being done effectively.  It also fails to determine which type of attack should be valued higher.  Is a leg kick from Shogun worth more than a straight left from Machida? We rarely see 10-10 or 10-8 rounds in MMA and 10-9 rounds are not being equally valued.  For example the 10-9 round in the Velasquez/Rothwell fight for Velasquez is not the same as a 10-9 round of Machida.  A 10-9 round that is clearly for one fighter should be given more credit than a 10-9 round for a close fight.

I am suggesting that a new scoring method should be created and adopted for MMA.

I know the amateur boxing scoring system is not widely accepted within the boxing community, but I believe it can be adapted to work well within MMA.  Fighters will be given points on what they do during the round: effective striking, dominant positions, submission attempts, ground transitions, escapes/reversals, and overall damage.  To get points, 2 of the 3 judges have to score the exchange for that fighter.  The judges will have a buzzer type of tool where they ring in what they deem is point worthy.  From here, I see two viable options. Keep the round-winning system, or use a Pride-based system where the whole bout is scored in its entirety.

Keeping the system similar to the current round-winning system goes as follows: at the end of the round the points will be tallied and the fighter with the higher point total wins the round.  The fighter with the majority of the rounds wins the fight.  The cumulative tallies are used in the event there is a draw for one or more of the individual rounds. In those cases where we have a tie for rounds won, the winner will be determined by the overall point totals. 

Another option would be to adopt the old Pride system where the winners were determined by what the fighters accomplished over the course of the entire fight. The winner of the fight would be determined by the cumulative totals. I believe this takes all the pressure off judging fights.  Instead of forcing the judges to make 3 or 5 separate decisions on 5-minute intervals of action, they will instead be relying on their instantaneous reactions to the fight in the ring. No longer will they have to replay each round in their head and convince themselves of who had the better cagemanship.

Regardless of which system is chosen, the move to the amateur boxing scoring system will force the judges become more knowledgeable on MMA and it will value more aspects of the fight rather than just giving the round to one guy because of a general set of criteria.  With a more specific set of criteria I hope the fighters will win based on their merits and not on what is perceived to be happening.

There are a few shortcomings with this system: competent judges, consistency between commissions, landing clean shots compared to power shots, judging between 2 simultaneous strikes, and valuing aggression.  Also it would need to be determined how many points are taken away if there is a foul by one of the fighters, and whether points will be taken away based of the severity of the penalty (i.e. intentional low-blows compared to a fighter stalling).   

By Davey S. and Desertsamurai31